Steve's certainly entitled to his opinion, but I also remember when he gave a fairly non-glowing mini-review of the V2. What did it really come down to at that time? Price. That was when the V1 wsa on fire sale for about $300. The V2 was going for its initial release price of $800 at that time. So... in his assessment of image quality versus the cost of the camera, he felt that the V1 was the clear winner. I suppose it was, to a certain degree, at those prices at that time. Does that mean that the V2 was somehow a highly flawed product? Well no, he never really cited any evidence of that, he just didn't think the V2 offered enough image improvement over the V1 to justify the cost difference. As a result of Steve's relatively negative review, a whole bunch of people wrote off the V2.

Well, here we are again. The V3 is even more expensive, the pictures aren't a gigantic leap forward in IQ, and Steve declares he's may not do a full review of the V3 due to his disappointment. Well... he only gave a very brief review of the V2 but... wait for it... now he says:

"I have some nice 1 system lenses so I may buy a V2 once it goes to fire sale clearance."

Ahh, I see. So there really wasn't anything so wrong with the V2, it's just the price issue. My conclusion is that Steve only likes Nikon 1 V-series cameras when they are $400 or less. That's when he wrote his glowing reviews of the V1. That's why he initially bagged on the V2 (at $800 it was too expensive). That seems to be his largest complaint with the V3 (at $1200 it's too expensive). He even says he wants the V3 to sell for $399. Well don't we all? I do think he is correct in that Nikon's initial prices are too high. Once the dust settles, though, people need semi-objective reviews to know whether the camera is good or bad, regardless of the price tag. He never gave us that article on the V2. Given his initial negativity towards the V2, I'm laughing that it is now suddenly just fine in comparison to the V3 (if it goes on a fire sale).

Happy V2 owner here. I bought it in spite of Steve's opinion. Though I don't expect to buy a V3 any time soon, I sure wouldn't be swayed away from it by this semi-rant of a semi-article.

To be fair, I think it's entirely appropriate to evaluate these cameras on what they deliver relative to their price - and the price of competing products in the market.

I like the V2, but I never would have bought it for $800 for the body, $900 for the kit. It simply doesn't stand up to several cameras that are more well rounded in the $699 to $899 kit prices. There are SOME things it does better - burst shooting, and continuous tracking AF, but for MOST things, the E-M10, GX7, and a6000 are better.

For $400-500, I can buy it as a niche product for the specific things it does exceptionally well. But it's never going to be my camera for shooting in low light conditions.